Cases 51 - 60 of 91
Valentine v. Waller et al
as 6:2012cv01180
Plaintiff:
Ramon Luis Valentine
Defendant:
Margaret T. Waller, John Doe, Jane Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Astrue
as 2:2012cv01098
Plaintiff:
Todd Darren Smith
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205
Daniel Cook, et al v. FDA, et al
as 12-5176
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Daniel Wayne Cook, Brett Patrick Pensinger, Stephen Michael West and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Food & Drug Administration, United States Department of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, in her official capacity as Secretary of Health and Human Services and others
Valentine v. Waller et al
as 6:2012cv00291
Plaintiff:
Ramon Luis Valentine
Defendant:
Margaret T. Waller, John Doe #1-2, Jane Doe #1-3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Fromm et al
as 5:2012cv03042
Defendant:
Darrell Fromm and (fnu) Garcia
Plaintiff:
Todd Carlton Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Valentine v. Waller et al
as 6:2011cv01884
Plaintiff:
Ramon Luis Valentine
Defendant:
Margaret T. Waller, John Doe #1 - #2, Jane Doe #1 - #3 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Todd Smith v. Cummings, et al
as 11-3339
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TODD CARLTON SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
STEVEN LAFRINERE
Defendant:
WILLIAM CUMMINGS, Kansas Department of Corrections, in his official and individual capacity, RAY ROBERTS, Kansas Department of Corrections, in his official and individual capacity, DON THOMAS, Kansas Department of Corrections, in his official and individual capacity and others
Smith v. United State of America
as 5:2010cv03243
Plaintiff:
Todd Carlton Smith
Defendant:
United State of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Smith v. United States of America
as 5:2010cv03231
Petitioner:
Todd Carlton Smith
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
